◆ SpookStack

‘ye YouCould Be on McGarthy's List In closing his Senate speech in which he gave the names of State Department employes who, he says, re suspected of disloyalty, Senator McCarthy made this statement in the form of a rhetorical question addressed to himself: if an individual is accused of reckless driving, jumping a stop sign, or embezzling from a bank, the American people get that information. So why should not the Amer-. ican people be informed when their servants are accused of Communist activities as a result of FBI investigations? Senator McCarthy knows the answer to his own question. When laws are violated in this country— uch as laws against reckless driving, disobeying rafic regulations, embezziement, etc._the ac- used person has @ right ta a public trial. ers charges must be proved in court beyond a reason- able doubt. The accusers must face the accused | The aceused has the right of counsel, the right! of appeal, the right to a jury and all the other rights a free people have secured to prevent the tyranny of injustice by Government or anybody else. A charge of disloyalty, based on information furnished to a Government department by the FEI or by otHer sources—other sources including Senator McCarthy—deoes not necessarily mean that the persen so charged has violated any law. lé there is valia reason to believe a law has bee violated, the accused is prosecuted in open court ith resulting publicity. There is nu law against membership in th Communist Party, unless such membership in- volves a charge of conspiracy against the Gov- ernment. There is no law against membership in the subversive organizations Nsted by the Attorney Generai. Such membership, in itself, involves no violation of law. But the Government has wisely decide against employment of Communists, those wh ale affiliated with subversive prganizations o tllose whose associations with such organiza- tions cast doubt on an employe’s loyalty. 1f the evidence against such an employe is not com- plete, yet a dcubt remains, that doubt is resolved in favor of the employing Government—not, as in a court of law, in favor of the defendant. When the FBI obtains information which reflects on the loyalty of an employc, that 3 formation is forwarded to the Government dq- rtment concerned. As Senator McCart nows, and as FBI Director Hoover has tak ins to point cut time and again, that informa- {jon is not evaluated by the FBI. In other words, the FBI does not undertake to say that the information is to be accepted on its face as evidence of disloyalty or other guilt. The eval- ation is left to others, such as the loyalty boards, hich investigate the nature of the information, ear the accused, and attempt to reach a fair oncinusion If doubt remains, the employe is _fired or permitted to resign, - Teo * 4 sn la a aon EET Tiel Eee. MA ne, coe. u 4 folson | ® Ladd Clegg Glavin__ Nichols Rosen__ Tracy_ Barbo_ | Alden Belmon _ Leughii: Mobr_ rele. RF. Nease___ Gandy__ ow Sh In Senator_McCarthy’s list ai Stet= Depart- x . ment employes, abou. half of them have already 7 écn cleared after ‘investigatic:.. Some «re Waiting hearingS. Some of them are goug hrough the business -wice. The question pos y Senator McCarthy is why they should be p tected by secrecy during this process. 4 The Government's position Is that it is un- be to subject an employe to the opprobrium of ST ublicity, linking his name-with an unproved Negation of disloyaity and thus condemn.ng him, without the beaefit of any semblance of trial, to tne resulting stigma. Is thal right or is it wrong? Would you, a cit.zen convinced of your own loyalty to your Government, welcome publicity if the FBI turned in a repdrt to your emplove based on the unevalus‘ed information of anony us informers to the effect tha, you were a Communist, and if it were publicly announced§ ue you were under investigation for disloyalty the strength of “FBI investigation’? If you believe that this would be fair to you, you agree with Senator McCarthy in making public the names of people who many se entive'v innocent of any disiayalty yet, in Senater Me- Carthy’s own words, ‘are accused oc: Communist agiivities as a result of PBI investigations.” But if you do agree that in your own case tis would be unjus., cannot agree witn ednatne Merarthy won can & Wad dread iny. _ ee Oe Times-Hers. Wash. Poe. , Uw L,. fash. bows wae / af! \ Yous. > Wash. St. \ N.Y. Mirrc re Ph.. a ~ DELL oy ae ae IT 8 i hi lc tl IT te een no